You don't say how long this has been happening or if you have already had any exchanges with the neighbour about whose hedge it is, where the boundary might be and if they hold the same or a different view from you. That could make a difference in what you had best say or do next. Which could be, nothing at all. Or have a friendly chat.

I am sure there are lots of variations on hedge maintenance. For example, currently I trim my side and the entire width of the top of what is left of my young neighbours hedge because he CBA. Otherwise it grows to a silly height. The older (OAP like me) previous neighbour got tree workers in twice a year to do both sides. It is the neighbour's boundary to maintain so the hedge is, over time, being replaced by fencing he puts up. The boundary is agreed as the line of the hedge main trunks.

this is what I really don't understand. In our case we have a line going right through the centre of a row of trees at the same offset angle to where trunks lie. So the trees clearly sit ON the border, and were there when our house was built by the developer. The plan has the T pointing to us. If the developer intended the hedges to be joint (in my case) why would a T be facing me? They would have put no T or an H? It was the 1970's so not that long ago

johnnyb wrote:they are on the title plan and are also specifically mentioned in the Transfer of Part which contains the covenants. It says that I am responsible for any borders marked with an inward T.

I am following this post with interest, as I find myself in a similar situation where the conifers are straddling the boundary line which is also a step up.In our case, Ts are there to indicate that its our side and the exact wording is "owns or accepts responsibility for the boundary". Does that mean that I am with in my right to trim these conifers ? There's no mention of conifers specifically in the paperwork.Thanks